FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing the page, Card Tips:Mystical Space Typhoon.

Please try to

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Be welcoming

Alright, so here's the topic of debate: Should Tips pages for important cards sit empty just because the card is basic and simple-but-effective? My suggestion is: Simple cards need simple tips. Points for:

  • Players who come looking for tips on how to use MST are unlikely to be experienced players, and hence will want simple advice.
  • Cards like Twister and Twin Twisters can simply say: See Card Tips for MST (with noted exceptions or clarifications for that particular use.
  • Blank pages are pretty much pointless, and adding a few lines of text is hardly going to hurt anything.
  • At this rate, the page is so useless it could be nominated for deletion, and no-one could really argue against it.

Points against:

  • Any tips added to a page on MST are going to be "obvious" so do they warrant inclusion?
  • Players should be learning the "obvious" stuff for themselves. (I would suggest this point is invalid in the age of YouTube).
  • Is there some problem with finite storage space or something?

Add anything else you want to. Please add you own opinion. Theotherguytm (talkcontribs) 10:09, January 15, 2019 (UTC)

theres no need to ~~debate~~ something this simple. Those are not even actual tips, are just edgy tricks regarding quick-play spells that any player would do insinctively. I tend to agree when you bring up debate about specific usage of certain cards, like Thunder Dragon Colossus, but this one is flat-out pointless and I'll undo any dumb edit, even if that means this will be the only page I'll keep editing on wikia. GustaphMax (talkcontribs) 10:14, January 15, 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Did you read points 1, 3 and 4 for and 1 against? There do not exist any tips for MST that are anything but "simple". But my point is: Simple tips for simple cards that will be read by inexperienced players. I can tell you know almost certainly for a fact that when you started playing the game, at least one of those tips was pointed out to you and it didn't seem that "obvious" at the time. Yes, this page would still be useless to any experienced players. But:

  • Since when do experienced players go looking for tips on MST? You're thinking from the wrong perspective, from the perspective of someone who's played for a long time. If you ask a new player how they use MST, I bet you any money their first "instinct" is to blindly play it from their hand first chance they get, most likely walking straight into the obvious pitfall I described, and not consider it as a backrow option.
  • If these simple tips can be applied to almost any Quick-Play Spell, wouldn't it be great if they were at least somewhere. And why not on the page of the most simple and important Quick-Play Spell in the game.
  • It's better that this page be "useless to any but inexperienced players" than totally useless, on the verge of a speedy deletion nomination.

The fact you don't think there's need for this debate, IMO, only proves the need for it further. If only so you can provide me a concrete reason why these tips are detrimental. All you've done so far is say they're pointless. But you have yet to provide me a reason why they are positively harmful, besides the problem some Tips pages have with pages the size of 3 screens, but I somehow think that's not going to be a problem.

When I have a debate about specific cards, like Colossus, it's normally about some important use central to said card's metagame uses. This isn't about that. This is about the frankly pointless policy of blanking entire pages for no reason other than leaving new players in the dark. And it doesn't take a wall of text. As I showed it's 3-4 lines max to massively improve the page. Theotherguytm (talkcontribs) 10:48, January 15, 2019 (UTC)

Alright Gustav, I've been giving this a think, and there's one way this can be satisfactorily resolved. If you can prove to me my edit made the page worse, then I'll back down and we need never have this conversation again. On the other hand if you can't, then your revert is almost certainly unconstructive, and could be taken as vandalism. While I'm definitely not saying that was your intention, it could be viewed that way by an outsider to this discussion. So if my edit was worthy of a revert, please tell me why it made the page worse.

Note: Pointless implies neutrality, not negative. So telling me my edit was pointless is the same thing as telling me it made little or no difference. And in my eyes, that's not grounds for a revert on an otherwise empty page. On a page 3 times the screen, yes. On this page? Like I said, it could be nominated for deletion and no-one could argue against it. Theotherguytm (talkcontribs) 11:48, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

I do agree that the site should also be welcome for new people, but it also should remain less redundant. In that sense, what do our policies say about this, first? Also, have you considered that there are other pages that have nearly the same effect (with some additional effects), and this style of editing should apply to those pages, too? What I should remind is that tips are subjective more than objective, and this sort of clash was bound to happen someday. Energy X 19:47, January 23, 2019 (UTC)
There is no specific policy on this type of thing, but digging around, I found on Yu-Gi-Oh!:Deletion process the following under the heading Arguments to avoid: It doesn't do any harm: "Just because an article does not directly harm somebody doesn't mean it should be kept. Its contents should meet the standards of the site. Standards of notability exist to prevent absolutly anything being posted. Similarly just because a page isn't immediately useful to anyone who might be reading it doesn't necessarily mean it's not notable."

Applying that to this case: It states that a page that achieves nothing shouldn't not be deleted just because "It doesn't do any harm". However, it goes on to state, that a page may not be pointless just because one person doesn't see it as useful, which I believe is what is happening here. And as for notability, the only thing I found was "more than six-cards/setup turn needed OTKs are a no unless proven to work or historic".

Those other pages can just say "See card tips of MST" (with relevant clarifications), with a link of course. My point is that these tips, obvious and for newbs they might be, should be somewhere. And what better place to put it than such a simple and iconic card, in basically every Starter Deck? Besides, the page was doing nothing but pointlessly existing. Yes, I agree card tips are subjective, and me and Gustav have had a few debates on various pages over individual cases. But he isn't even debating this one (and if you look at the timestamps, I've given him plenty of chance to defend his views, and a criteria for me to back down). Anyway, thanks for your input and help. Your further input is welcome and encouraged. Theotherguytm (talkcontribs) 20:41, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

You know, after talking with the guys a bit, and thinking of my own, I say we should let the tip stay. It's more because this is a rather simple card with a simple effect, one that is used by new players (note how many times it was featured in Structure and Starter Decks, and under Common rarity). It hints towards that it isn't used very much by professional players, if I am correct, so it's more of a newbie tip. Energy X 19:47, January 29, 2019 (UTC)
Ok, thanks that was what I was saying. Any further input or discussion is of course very good, and I'd like to suggest that Twi-Twi and Cosmic Cyclone etc have a link to this page. Any thoughts on what other basic cards would be appropriate to receive a similar treatment, if any? Thanks again. Theotherguytm (talkcontribs) 20:18, January 29, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.